A Trump-appointed federal judge has dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuit challenging Minnesota's sanctuary immigration policies, ruling that the state cannot be constitutionally compelled to assist federal immigration enforcement.
Chief U.S. District Judge Eric Tostrud rejected all claims brought by the Justice Department against Minnesota, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Hennepin County in a 56-page opinion. The lawsuit, filed by the Trump administration, argued that Minnesota's laws and local ordinances illegally hindered Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by restricting local officials from holding immigrants solely on ICE detainers, limiting participation in federal immigration enforcement, and restricting the sharing of data with ICE.
Judge Tostrud concluded that the challenged laws regulate only state and local officials and do not command or forbid actions by the federal government or its contractors. "Rather, they regulate how state and local officials perform their duties," Tostrud wrote.
The ruling represents a significant setback for the administration's broader strategy to challenge sanctuary policies nationwide by asserting that they interfere with federal immigration enforcement. The Justice Department contended that Minnesota's restrictions conflicted with federal statutes by preventing local officers from honoring ICE detainers and limiting cooperation with federal authorities.
However, Tostrud invoked the Tenth Amendment's anti-commandeering doctrine, stating that while Congress has broad authority over immigration, it cannot compel states to use their personnel and resources for federal programs. "The framers explicitly chose a Constitution that confers upon Congress the power to regulate individuals, not States," the opinion read, adding that the federal government "may not command the States' officers...to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program."
The judge also dismissed the administration's argument that Minnesota's refusal to cooperate with ICE constituted obstruction. "Refusing to help is not the same as impeding," Tostrud wrote.
Minnesota officials have defended their sanctuary-style policies, arguing they encourage immigrants in the country illegally to cooperate with local law enforcement by assuring them that reporting crimes or serving as witnesses will not automatically trigger immigration enforcement.
The legal dispute occurred amidst heightened immigration enforcement in Minnesota, including the Trump administration's Operation Metro Surge. This large-scale ICE initiative drew protests and increased the federal law enforcement presence. The operation intensified following the deaths of two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, who were shot and killed by federal agents in separate incidents in January. Following these events, President Donald Trump removed then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem from overseeing the operation, with border czar Tom Homan taking charge.
Homan had previously stated that greater cooperation from Minnesota officials would reduce the necessity for large-scale ICE operations. He argued that cooperation, particularly with jails and prisons, would grant federal agents better access to individuals residing in the U.S. illegally, thereby reducing the need for federal agents on Minnesota streets.
The ruling comes as the Trump administration continues to pursue similar lawsuits against sanctuary policies in other states. Attorneys for Minnesota's sanctuary policies have argued that Tostrud's ruling may conflict with previous Eighth Circuit decisions that they contend give the federal government stronger grounds to challenge state laws interfering with immigration enforcement. They suggest that while states are not required to assist the federal government, prohibiting voluntary cooperation presents a more complex legal question.
